or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › What are the best friends of your country?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What are the best friends of your country? - Page 12  

post #166 of 266
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Ernest, look this picture closely, and remeber without the US, this would be life today in France. Normandy, 9,387 American military Dead, most of whom gave their lives during the landing.
The war was really over by the end of the summer of 1943, after the battle of Kursk, as to who would win (because the Germans had lost the cream of its army in Russia and was in full retreat). When the Americans, Brits and Canadians landed in France in June 1944 it was just mopping up against old men and young boys.
post #167 of 266
Quote:
Why do you need to always repeat that without US France would be German (as if France has been existing for 200 yeards like US) as you can beat Germans only because you are 2 times more than them? Don't forget that without French, US wouldn't have existed in 1939. And that G Bush is French.
This is not a proven fact, and there is much evidence that would suggest the US would have won the war w/o the French naval intervention (although Lafayette played an important and undeniable role)
post #168 of 266
Quote:
Quote:
(nightowl6261a @ Feb. 25 2005,22:46) Ernest, look this picture closely, and remeber without the US, this would be life today in France. Normandy, 9,387 American military Dead, most of whom gave their lives during the landing.
The war was really over by the end of the summer of 1943, after the battle of Kursk, as to who would win (because the Germans had lost the cream of its army in Russia and was in full retreat). When the Americans, Brits and Canadians landed in France in June 1944 it was just mopping up against old men and young boys.
Ugh, as we've pointed out a number of times, the only reason the Germans held back 1/3 of their troops on the western front was because they were trying to protect against a US invasion. They lost a huge amount of their troops before this in Africa and Italy as well. W/o US intervention and support, the war would have been over far before 1943.
post #169 of 266
Quote:
The US mobilized over 10 MILLION troops for WWI, although only about 3 million were sent over to Europe before the war was over.  That was about 1/3 of the POPULATION of Germany.  They were even stronger for WWII, and while in 1939, Germany was stronger than the US, it didn't take long for the US to mobilize its forces in a way that would have overwhelmed the Germans.  It's true that the US didn't need a strong military between the wars, because we have no enemies within range (or so we thought) but if Germany was our neighbor, we would have kept pace in terms of arms, because they would have been a threat.  Even if they were on our border and invaded, conquering the US is almost imposslble in even the most optimistic scenario... the US is much larger than even European Russia, and our industrial base is widespread.  This whole discussion is just ridiculous, this is like a war fantasy league.
Correct me if i'm wrong, but my Russians friends told me that the Russian casualties in WW2 alone were more than 20.000.000 persons. Not in the last place due to Stalin's decisions to wipe out the Red Army's Officers core. But I am no military history expert, I just think the U.S. couldn't have done it without the Russian sacrifices and the Russians couldn't have done it without the Americans. Basically the trouble when occupying Europe is that there always will be a Western and an Eastern front. That is what defeated the Germans imho. What I also found interesting is the mobilization of American troups during WW2. In the first 1,5 years it took them a lot of time to assemble the necessary troups and to deploy them. But after that the speed at which they sent out troops was very impressive.
post #170 of 266
Thread Starter 
Quote:
The US mobilized over 10 MILLION troops for WWI, although only about 3 million were sent over to Europe before the war was over.  That was about 1/3 of the POPULATION of Germany.  They were even stronger for WWII, and while in 1939, Germany was stronger than the US, it didn't take long for the US to mobilize its forces in a way that would have overwhelmed the Germans.  It's true that the US didn't need a strong military between the wars, because we have no enemies within range (or so we thought) but if Germany was our neighbor, we would have kept pace in terms of arms, because they would have been a threat.  Even if they were on our border and invaded, conquering the US is almost imposslble in even the most optimistic scenario... the US is much larger than even European Russia, and our industrial base is widespread.  This whole discussion is just ridiculous, this is like a war fantasy league.
Ok, so conlusion = amercians are the best of the best in war... I don't think that US is largarger than from France to Moscow..
post #171 of 266
Quote:
Ok, so conlusion = amercians are the best of the best in war...
Wow, did you arrive at that conclusion all by yourself?
post #172 of 266
Thread Starter 
Quote:
my Russians friends told me that the Russian casualties in WW2 alone were more than 20.000.000 persons. Not in the last place due to Stalin's decisions to wipe out the Red Army's Officers core.
But American lost only 9000 soldiers in Normandie.. So they must be very very much better soldiers than russians who lost 20 M of people (not only soldiers) and needed obsolutely these 9 000 to win.
post #173 of 266
France bad.  France devil.  French people are most evil in world.  They will do anything for money and do not care about rest of world.  They are like vermin in the light, cowardly and shirking. They are insular and do not mix with others. It's interesting, whenever ernest gets involved in something, people embark on a demonization of the French that is tantamount to a pogrom.
post #174 of 266
Quote:
France bad.  France devil.  French people are most evil in world.  
But boy, can they cook up a meal of apples and oranges.
post #175 of 266
Roy, I think the US could have defeated Germany w/o Russian success on the Eastern front, but it would have taken much longer to accomplish. If Germany hadn't declared war against the US on December 11, 1941, and the US had been concentrating only on the Pacific front, and defeated Japan more quickly, they could still have won the war in Europe, but the war of attrition would have been more severe (this is of course considering that the UK didn't fall, which is likely even w/o the Russians) In a long term war (10-15 years) Europe just didn't have the natural resource base to support a war against the US. If that war had been fought, it likely would have been ghastly, probably featuring blasting a beachhead into the Baltic with nuclear strikes against Hamburg and Williamshaven, and perhaps against German-held French targets as well. Again, we're well into a very hypothetical situation here, but a simple study of industrial capacity and natural resources favors the Americans.
post #176 of 266
Quote:
Correct me if i'm wrong, but my Russians friends told me that the Russian casualties in WW2 alone were more than 20.000.000 persons. Not in the last place due to Stalin's decisions to wipe out the Red Army's Officers core.
This is a number that is in some dispute, and can probably never be supported by a preponderance of evidence.  It includes every Russion -- civilian or military -- who died for any reason between 1941 and 1945. There is no doubt that Russian losses were staggeringly high.  Not least because the Germans bagged a lot of POWs early in Barbarossa, and hardly any survived the war.  The civilian populations also suffered massively under German occupation.  But things were not exactly great before the Germans came.  Stalin's famines and five year plans and purges and show trials were not many years in the past, after all. Life on the steppes was rough. Anyway, the number may not have been 20 million.  But it was a lot.
post #177 of 266
There are about 80,000 American soldiers buried in France from WWII... just for reference. The US lost 2 1/2 as many soldiers killed as France, and the war was FOUGHT in france.
post #178 of 266
Thread Starter 
Quote:
They will do anything for money and do not care about rest of world.  They are cowardly and shirking.
So I was right = we are very close to Americans..... But we signed the Kyoto protocol.
post #179 of 266
Quote:
But we signed the Kyoto protocol.
But you will never implement it, and neither will anyone else.
post #180 of 266
According to my source, the Soviets lost 8,668,000 soldiers and about 16 million civilians. Noone is denying that they played an important role in WWII, but Soviet military prowess is incredibly overstated, the Germans had kill ratios of 10:1 in Russia, human wave tactics are not exactly state of the art.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › What are the best friends of your country?